Jack v. Chapman et al

Filing 44

MEMORANDUM OPINION. SEE OPINION for complete details. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 04/13/2018. Copy mailed to Plaintiff as directed.(ccol, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division JAMES L. JACK, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No. MICHAEL L. CHAPMAN, ^ 3;16CV316 al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION James L. Jack, a Virginia inmate, has submitted this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter is before the Court on Jack's failure to serve Defendant Rima, the Motion to Dismiss filed and by Defendants ("Defendants"), § 1915A, 42 and U.S.C. the Sean Dikeman Court's § 1997e{c). obligations For the Joshua under reasons 28 Lowden U.S.C. stated below, the Motion to Dismiss will be granted and Jack's claims will be dismissed. I. FAILURE TO SERVE DEFENDANT RIMA Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m),^ Jack had 90 days to serve Defendants. Here, that period commenced ^ Rule 4(m) provides, in pertinent part: If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court on

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?